I think that the idea is that more Dems use mail-in ballots than Reps. Hand in hand with tactics like restricting the number of polling stations in minority neighborhoods, it’s just another component of putting their thumb on the scale.
Back in the 70’s and 80’s there were “Travesty Generators”. You pushed some text into them and they developed linguistic rules based on probabilities determined by the text. Then you could have them generate brand new text randomly created by applying the linguistic rules developed from the source text.
Surprisingly, they would generate “brand new” words that weren’t in the original text, but were real words. And the output matched stylistically to the input text. So you put in Shakespeare and you got out something that sounded like Shakespeare. You get the idea.
I built one and tried running some TS Eliot through it, because stuff is, IMHO, close to gibberish to begin with. The results were disappointing. Basically because it couldn’t get any more gibberishy that the source.
I strongly suspect that the same would happen with Trump’s gibberish. There used to be a bunch of Travesty Generators online, and you could probably try one out to see.
My question is how much “likely” translates to “voted”. It seems easy to respond, “Yes”, when asked on the phone, but requires a bit more enthusiasm to actually go stand in line and cast a vote.
Also, the final note on the bass is a mistake, but they left it in.
Agreed, but I don’t know the mindset of those people and how to think of them. Do we just take them out of the voter pool? Are they potentially swing?
My take on 2016 was that the Dems were deeply unenthusiastic about Hillary - and who can blame them - so they didn’t show up to vote. On the other hand the Reps were stoked about Trump so they turned up at the polls.
Swing voters? I don’t get it. I cannot see any rational person sitting in the middle comparing Trump and Harris and picking Trump as a better presidential option. Irrational people? My gut tells me they they are probably sitting and the far ends of either camp.
My guess is that the people closer to the middle aren’t actually swing voters, but they are far more likely to have their enthusiasm to vote influenced than the true believers.
The big question, in my opinion, is how much - or how little - the polls reflect the enthusiasm to go out and vote. My impression is that Dem enthusiasm in high right now, while not so much for the Reps. It’s possible that a 50/50 poll may hide the fact that a big chunk of one of the 50% is much less likely to actually vote.
I’m Canadian, so I see the news but I don’t have day to day experience with US voters. Of course, neither do the 90% of Americans that don’t live in those swing states.
Isn’t that true about all US elections? There are no “undecided” voters, just Dems and Reps and the result is always based on who can motivate their voters the most.
I think there might be a better way to deliver “ballistic missiles to Russia”.
I don’t think that they did.
It seems weird to have a figure from Greek mythology paddling between what looks like a Christian heaven and hell.
It’s just as much a sport as figure skating or synchronised swimming.
I’m not sure if traffic is “convenience” at this point. At least where I live, it’s a nearly essential piece of functionality.
In fact, for local driving it’s often the only reason to use a map app. I already know how to get to most of the places I want to go, I just need to know the best route to avoid traffic now.
Thank God somebody got it.
“Intercourse!”
Why not? He’s an amazing speaker and he comes across as extremely thoughtful and intelligent.
It goes really well with YAGNI. Also DRY without YAGNI is a recipe for premature over-architecting.
This is also one of the main benefits of TDD. There was a really good video that I can’t find again of a demonstration of how TDD leads you to different solutions than you thought you use when you started. Because you code exclusively for one single requirement at a time, adding or changing just enough code to meet each new requirement without breaking the earlier tests. The design then evolves.
I’ve always heard of your “post-architecture” referred to as “evolutionary design”.
COBOL is not hard to learn. But it takes years to develop the muscles in your fingers to the point where you can write a subroutine in a single session.
My first experience with this food was in Halifax decades ago. The Halifax Donair is a unique thing.
And it’s definitely Donair, not Doner.
You might want to think about it a bit more before putting it to work. The comment with the streams example is far, far better.